http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html?pagewanted=all
To NPR Morning Edition:
As a loyal listener for almost a decade, I have never been more upset at your organization than after hearing the March 15th story on the Goldman Sachs whistle-blower Greg Smith. Chris Arnold portrayed Mr. Smith as some caricatured whack-job burn-out, who was fulfilling a selfish fantasy (that many of us share) of publicly flaming a former employer. He even dared to compare Mr. Smith to the infamous JetBlue flight attendant Steven Slater, as well as a person who wrote his resignation letter in Cheese Whiz. Needless to say, Mr. Smith's situation bears absolutely zero resemblance.
This depiction is outrageous, and denigrates the brave and dignified actions of Mr. Smith. This is not NPR-worthy material, and you owe Mr. Smith and your listeners an apology. He is not doing this for 15 minutes of fame, or because he just "lost it" one bad day. I do not know Mr. Smith's background, but after reading his thoughtful letter to the New York Times, I believe that he has sincere love for the institution of Goldman Sachs, his peers/clients, and the important profession of financial advising, which is why he was so dismayed to watch his firm degenerate into the unfortunately all-too-typical paradigm of greedy, disrespectful Wall Street behavior that is anathema to its stated cultural values. If his allegations are accurate, the ramifications are profound.
Mr. Smith has nothing to gain from this bold action and much to lose. But I believe that his goal is to spread awareness, and get firms like Goldman Sachs to sober up and turn things around before it is too late. Goldman Sachs is too important of a global economic player to allow its ranks to engage in the type of dysfunctional behaviors described by Mr. Smith and others. It is bad for the firm, its clients, and society. I am sure that many Goldman Sachs business units are well respected, performing professionally, and delivering excellent customer service, but after several shocking revelations and a multimillion-dollar fine, the writing is on the wall that there is something fundamentally wrong at Goldman Sachs.
As we barely survived an historic financial crisis, and are just starting to dig ourselves out of the Great Recession, we can't afford to tolerate continued brazen financial services hubris, conflict of interest, and misconduct. That is what Mr. Smith was trying to advocate, and he should be commended for it, not mocked. Especially from a supposedly populist and progressive news organization like NPR.
---------
A good take on the Smith-Goldman controversy: http://www.forbes.com/sites/halahtouryalai/2012/03/14/the-real-problem-at-goldman-sachs-you-the-muppet-client/
It's like the 1% vs. the 99%. A smart friend told me that we 99% are mostly to blame, because we continue to let the 1% abuse us. Maybe because we hope to join their ranks some day, or simply that we selfishly need them to put food on our table. But despite our structural disadvantages, we can and should be able to take down the 1% if we really wanted to. But we don't, because we're incredulous, ignorant, lazy, apathetic, selfish, scared, or something. Even the illiterate, unarmed peasants during the Russian and French revolutions took out their oppressive aristocrats. What is our problem?
Yes the Goldmans of the world are "bad" for abusing their position and scamming others. But we are also to blame for letting them get away with it. Even if they are protected by gov't forces and biased laws, we can crush them if we really want to - simply by taking our business elsewhere. But we are greedy too, and we entrust our wealth to them, even if we don't really trust them to put our interests first. I guess a Goldman that does us wrong now and then is still better than no Goldman to hold our hand and help us navigate the ridiculously complex world of modern finance that they helped create for their own advantage.
No comments:
Post a Comment